Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


The Journal of University of Physical Education in Wroclaw

4 Issues per year

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.101

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Biomechanical changes in pregnant women

Agnieszka Opala-Berdzik
  • The Chair of Rudiments of Clinical Physiotherapy, Department of Physiotherapy, University of Physical Education, Katowice
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Bogdan Bacik
  • The Chair of Human Motor Functions, Department of Physical Education, University of Physical Education, Katowice
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Małgorzata Kurkowska
Published Online: 2010-11-08 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10109-010-0019-6

Zmiany biomechaniczne u kobiet w ciąży

Celem pracy jest przedstawienie problemów związanych z różnorodnymi biomechanicznymi zmianami w układzie mięśniowo-szkieletowym kobiet w ciąży dotyczącymi postawy ciała także w aspekcie dolegliwości bólowych, zwłaszcza w dolnym odcinku pleców. Poruszane są zagadnienia związane ze zmianą funkcjonalnego zakresu ruchomości tułowia oraz ograniczeniami i trudnościami w wykonywaniu czynności codziennych i zawodowych. W pracy przedstawiono także wpływ ciąży na stabilność posturalną i chód. Wiedza zawarta w artykule powinna być pomocna zarówno osobom prowadzącym zajęcia w szkołach rodzenia, jak też lekarzom i fizjoterapeutom w profilaktyce oraz leczeniu dolegliwości układu mięśniowo-szkieletowego u kobiet w ciąży i po porodzie.

Biomechanical changes in pregnant women

The purpose of the paper is to present the problems related to various biomechanical changes taking place in the musculoskeletal system in pregnant women concerning body posture and pain problems and especially low back pain. The changes of the functional motion range of the trunk as well as the limitations and difficulties in daily life activities and work performance are taken into consideration. The influence of pregnancy on postural stability and gait is also presented in the paper. The knowledge gathered in the article should be helpful to those who provide the child birth classes as well as to physicians and physical therapists in prevention and treatment of musculoskeletal complaints of women during pregnancy and post partum.

Keywords: ciąża; biomechanika

Keywords: pregnancy; biomechanics

  • Konkler C. J. Principles of exercise for the obstetric patient, [w:] C. Kisner, L. A. Colby,# (red.) Therapeutic exercise foundations and techniques. Davis Company, Philadelphia, 1990, 547-576.Google Scholar

  • Jensen R. K. i wsp. Changes in segment mass and mass distribution during pregnancy. J. Biomech., 1996, 29, 2, 251-256.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gilleard W. L., Brown J. M. Structure and function of the abdominal muscles in primigravid subjects during pregnancy and the immediate postbirth period. Phys. Ther., 1996, 76, 7, 750-762.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Fast A. i wsp. Low-back pain in pregnancy. Abdominal muscles, sit-up performance, and back pain. Spine, 1990, 15, 1, 28-30CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dumas G. A., Reid J. G. Laxity of knee cruciate ligaments during pregnancy. J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther., 1997, 26, 1, 2-6.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Franklin M. E., Conner-Kerr T. An analysis of posture and back pain in the first and third trimesters of pregnancy. J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther., 1998, 28, 3, 133-138.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Otman A. S. i wsp. The importance of ‘lumbar lordosis measurement device’ application during pregnancy, and post-partum isometric exercise. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol., 1989, 31, 2, 155-162.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gilleard W. L. i wsp. Static trunk posture in sitting and standing during pregnancy and early postpartum. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 2002, 83, 12, 1739-1744.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ireland M. L., Ott S. M. The effects of pregnancy on the musculosceletal system. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res., 2000, 372, 169-179.Google Scholar

  • Ostgaard H. C. i wsp. Influence of some biomechanical factors on low-back pain in pregnancy. Spine, 1993, 18, 1, 61-65.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Novaes F. S. i wsp. Lombalgia na gestacao. (Low back pain during gestation). Rev. Lat. Am Enfermagem, 2006, 14, 4, 620-624.Google Scholar

  • Fast A. i wsp. Low-back pain in pregnancy. Spine, 1987, 12, 4, 368-371.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ostgaard H. C. i wsp. Prevalence of back pain in pregnancy. Spine, 1991, 16, 5, 549-552.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wu W. i wsp. Pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain, I: terminology, clinical presentation, and prevalence. Eur. Spine J., 2004, 13, 7, 575-589.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wang S. M. Backaches related to pregnancy: the risk factors, etiologies, treatments and controversial issues. Curr. Opin. Anaesthesiol., 2003, 16, 3, 269-273.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Gutke A. i wsp. Predicting persistent pregnancy-related low back pain. Spine, 2008, 33, 12, 386-393.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Ostgaard H. C. i wsp. Reduction of back and posterior pelvic pain in pregnancy. Spine, 1994, 19, 8, 894-900.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gutke A. i wsp. Association between muscle function and low back pain in relation to pregnancy. J. Rehabil. Med., 2008, 40, 4, 304-311.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ostgaard H. C. i wsp. The posterior pelvic pain provocation test in pregnant women. Eur. Spine J., 1994, 3, 5, 258-260.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nilsson-Wikmar L. i wsp. Back pain in women post-partum is not a unitary concept. Physiother. Res. Int., 1999, 4, 3, 201-213.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nilsson-Wikmar L. i wsp. Perceived pain and self-estimated activity limitations in women with back pain post-partum. Physiother. Res. Int., 2003, 8, 1, 23-35.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gutke A. i wsp. Pelvic girdle pain and lumbar pain in pregnancy: a cohort study of the consequences in terms of health and functioning. Spine, 2006, 31, 5, 149-155.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ronchetti I. i wsp. Physical characteristics of women with severe pelvic girdle pain after pregnancy: a descriptive cohort study. Spine, 2008, 33, 5, 145-151.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Gilleard W. L. i wsp. Effect of pregnancy on trunk range of motion when sitting and standing. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand., 2002, 81, 1011-1020.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cheng P. L. i wsp. Analysis of self-reported problematic tasks of pregnant women. Ergonomics, 2006, 49, 3, 282-292.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lou S. Z. i wsp. Sit-to-stand at different periods of pregnancy. Clin. Biomech., 2001, 16, 3, 194-198.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Paul J. A., Frings-Dresen M. H. Standing working posture compared in pregnant and non-pregnant conditions. Ergonomics, 1994, 37, 9, 1563-1575.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Nicholls J. A., Grieve D. W. Posture, performance and discomfort in pregnancy. Appl. Ergon., 1992, 23, 2, 128-132.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Masten W. Y., Smith J. L. Reaction time and strength in pregnant and nonpregnant employed women. J. Occup. Med., 1988, 30, 5, 451-456.Google Scholar

  • Ribas S. I., Guirro E. C. O. Analise da pressao plantar e do eqilibro postural em diferentes fases da gestacao./Analysis of plantar pressure and postural balance during different phases of pregnancy. Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia / Brazilian J. Phys. Ther., 2007, 11, 5, 391-397.Google Scholar

  • Jang J. i wsp. Balance (perceived and actual) and preferred stance width during pregnancy. Clin. Biomech., 2008, 23, 4, 468-476.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Butler E. E. i wsp. Postural equilibrium during pregnancy: decreased stability with an increased reliance on visual cues. Am J. Ogstet. Gynecol., 2006, 195, 4, 1104-1108.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nyska M. i wsp. Plantar foot pressures in pregnant women. Isr. J. Med. Sci., 1997, 33, 2, 139-146.Google Scholar

  • Lymbery J. K., Gilleard W. The stance phase of walking during pregnancy: temporospatial and ground reaction force variables. J. Am Podiatr. Med. Assoc., 2005, 95, 3, 247-253.Google Scholar

  • Bird A. R. i wsp. The effect of pregnancy on footprint parameters. A prospective investigation. J. Am Podiatr. Med. Assoc., 1999, 89, 8, 405-409.Google Scholar

  • Foti T. i wsp. A biomechanical analysis of gait during pregnancy. J. Bone Joint Surg., 2000, 82, 5, 625-633.Google Scholar

  • Wu W. i wsp. Gait coordination in pregnancy: transverse pelvic and thoracic rotations and their relative phase. Clin. Biomech., 2004, 19, 5, 480-488.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2010-11-08

Published in Print: 2009-07-01

Citation Information: Physiotherapy, Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 51–55, ISSN (Print) 1230-8323, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10109-010-0019-6.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Eric Watelain, Antonio Pinti, Racha Doya, Cyril Garnier, Hechmi Toumi, and Samuel Boudet
The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 2017, Volume 45, Number 3, Page 293

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in